Shaheen losing ground against Brown in latest UNH polling data

Fewer than a third of likely voters have decided which candidate they support in New Hampshire’s race for the U.S. Senate.

Incumbent Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen still leads against all three of the major Republicans vying for their party’s nomination in the latest data from the UNH Survey Center. But former U.S. senator Scott Brown has almost closed what was once a wide statistical gap.

Brown faces a primary Sept. 9 against candidates including former U.S. senator Bob Smith and former state senator Jim Rubens.

If the election were held today and Shaheen and Brown were the candidates, 46 percent of likely voters would vote for Shaheen and 44 percent would vote for Brown. Fewer than 10 percent are undecided between the two.

In July, Shaheen had support from 50 percent of people polled while Brown received support from only 38 percent.

Against Brown, Shaheen’s campaign “is being weighed down by national politics, particularly the declining popularity of President Obama,” the polling center reported.

Shaheen still maintains comfortable leads over Smith and Rubens.

If Smith were the Republican nominee, 50 percent of likely voters said they would vote for Shaheen, 36 percent would vote for Smith, 2 percent would support someone else and 13 percent would be undecided.

If Rubens were the Republican nominee, 49 percent of likely voters said they would vote for Shaheen, 35 percent would vote for Rubens, 1 percent would support someone else and 15 percent would be undecided.

The center interviewed 827 New Hampshire residents via landline and cell phones over 10 days earlier this month. Half of the people surveyed are undeclared voters; 24 percent were registered Democrats and 26 percent were registered Republicans.

(Sarah Palermo can be reached at 369-3322 or spalermo@cmonitor.com or on Twitter @SPalermoNews.)

Jeanne Shaheen has supported Mr Obama's programs. To enact these programs that made false promises to the voters. Obama/Shaheen promised us we could keep our doctors and that health insurance premiums would go down. Instead, the ACA has proven to be a disaster for almost everyone who had health insurance, including those whose physicians are affiliated with Concord Hospital. A price should be paid for lying to the voters.

BestPresidentReagan wrote:

08/23/2014

there are chat rooms for you two

JosephSHaas wrote:

08/22/2014

Hey Sarah, since you like polls so much, check this one out over at: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/july_2014/68_think_election_rules_rigged_for_incumbents = " 68% Think Election Rules Rigged for Incumbents. . . The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on July 9-10, 2014 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology. " - - Joe

BestPresidentReagan wrote:

08/22/2014

Good reporting would have given a link to the poll and the sampling error. As a public service I will do what the CM fails to do 1) margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 3.4 percent 2)http://cola.unh.edu/sites/cola.unh.edu/files/research_publications/gsp2014_summer_senate082114.pdf..Shaheen is an old professional politician with old ideas. We need new blood in Washington.

LaurieFenwick wrote:

08/22/2014

A vote for Shaheen is a vote for Bloomberg: Control of the Senate could lie in the fortunes of female candidates and the deep-pocketed donors, like former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who are sending piles of cash their way. So far this election cycle, donors have handed over $46 million to a collection of political committees and candidates linked to Emily's List, which backs female contenders who support abortion rights. The Emily's List network of committees raised more than most other outside groups, including the GOP-backed American Crossroads and the anti-tax Club for Growth. According to campaign finance documents filed Tuesday, one of the newest benefactors for Emily's List was Bloomberg. The billionaire former mayor wrote a $2 million check last month to Women Vote, the super PAC run by the group. The check put the mayor's giving to all super PACs this cycle at $11 million, and Bloomberg's total tally was likely to grow ahead of a Wednesday deadline for many groups to disclose their July fundraising.

tillie wrote:

08/22/2014

That is terrible. We can't have women take over the government and make their own decisions.

DirtyLarry wrote:

08/22/2014

And "take over" is exactly why we've yet to put a woman in the oval office. She won't serve her term, she'll try to take over!!!